BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 710 of 2019.
Date of Institution : 18.12.2019.
Date of Decision : 22.09.2023.
- Ram Murti son of Shri Manphool,
- Vinod Kumar son of Shri Ram Murti, both residents of village Mochiwali, Tehsil and District Sirsa.
……Complainants.
Versus.
- The Branch Manager, H.D.F.C. Bank, Janta Bhawan Road, Sirsa.
- The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Janta Bhawan Road, Sirsa through its Branch Manager.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 (as amended under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019).
BEFORE: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………………………MEMBER.
SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA …………………MEMBER
Present: Sh. P.K. Bagria, Advocate for complainants.
Sh. M.S. Sethi, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Sh. K.L. Gagneja, Advocate for opposite party no.2.
ORDER
The present joint complaint has been filed by complainants against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred as OPs) seeking insurance claim for the loss of their paddy crop of Kharif, 2018.
2. The brief facts of the present complaint are that complainants are agriculturists having agricultural land in village Mochiwali, Tehsil and District Sirsa. They are having bank account number 50200018670109 with op no.1 and they are having KCC limit with the op no.1 bank. It is further averred that paddy crop of complainants of kharif, 2018 was insured with op no.2 through op no.1 under Prime Minister Fasal Beema Yojna after paying requisite premium amount of Rs.4160/- and premium is being paid to op no.2 since 2016 for insurance of their paddy crop. That complainants had sown paddy crop in their land measuring 07 acres 1 kanal which was damaged due to natural calamities and the spot inspection was also conducted by the Agriculture Department as well as officials of the insurance company and the committee also reported that farmers of village Mochiwali are entitled to insurance claim amount of Rs.12,000/- per acre due to damage of their paddy crop and this amount has been paid to several farmers who have got insured their crops. That complainants are also entitled to get compensation on account of damage of their crop but they have not been paid any amount so far. It is further averred that complainants several times requested the ops to make the payment of compensation amount but they always put off the matter on one pretext or the other and on 08.07.2019 complainants moved application to op no.1 in this regard but no action has been taken so far. That on 22.11.2019 complainants also got served legal notice upon the ops but to no effect and in this way the ops have caused unnecessary harassment and mental agony to the complainants. Hence, this complaint.
3. On notice, ops appeared. Op no.1 filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that an amount of Rs.4160.10 has been debited in the account of complainants on 02.07.2018 and same was transferred to op no.2 as premium for insurance of paddy crop of kharif season of complainant, hence op no.2 is liable to compensate the complainants for any loss to the said crop. It is further submitted that after receiving the premium amount by op no.2 for insurance of crop of complainants, the matter of claim of compensation for crops is in between complainant and op no.2. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.1 made.
4. Op no.2 filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections regarding objective of scheme, coverage of farmers, coverage of crops, general exclusions, not maintainability for want of jurisdiction, non intimation, non submission of proof of loss or weather report, limited coverage as per scheme, yield basis claims are decided by Government, no survey no quantification of loss, no privity of contract and non impleading of necessary parties. On merits, it is submitted that had the premium been deducted from the account of the complainants their crop would have been insured and their account particulars for the purpose of insurance would have been uploaded on the National Crop Insurance Portal of PMFBY by the nodal bank but their account particulars are not uploaded on the portal. Thus, the crop of complainants was not insured with answering op. It is further submitted that no premium for crop of complainants of village Mochiwali was ever remitted to answering op and crop of complainants was not insured with op no.2, therefore, op no.2 is not liable to pay any claim amount and compensation to the complainants. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint has been made.
5. The complainants in evidence have tendered affidavit of complainant Vinod Kumar Ex. C1 and copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C6.
6. On the other hand, op no.1 has tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Saurabh Mehta, Assistant Manager & Principal Officer as Ex.R1 and copies of documents Ex.R2 and Ex.R3. Op no.2 has tendered affidavit of Ms. Puja, Incharge as Ex.R4 and copies of relevant clauses of operational guidelines of PMFBY Ex.R5 and Ex.R6.
7. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for complainants has also placed on record report/ letter of the Deputy Director, Agriculture department, Sirsa alongwith khasra girdawari.
8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.
9. The first and foremost question arises for consideration as to whether there was any loss to the paddy crop of complainants in their land situated in village Mochiwali or not? In this regard, a report/ letter of Deputy Director Agriculture department, Sirsa dated 02.08.2023 has been placed on file by complainants themselves in which it is reported that the average yield of paddy crop in Kharif, 2018 in village Mochiwali was 3648.29 Kgs. per hectare and threshold yield of paddy crop of block Nathusari Chopta in Kharif, 2018 was 2437.02 Kgs. per hectare. Since the average yield of paddy crop of kharif, 2018 of village Mochiwali was more than the threshold yield of paddy crop of block Nathusari Chopta, therefore, as per revised operational guidelines of PMFBY, there was no loss of paddy crop of kharif, 2018 of complainants. No other report regarding any loss of their paddy crop of kharif, 2018 has been placed on file by the complainants. Since there was no loss to the paddy crop of kharif, 2018 of complainants, therefore, complainants are not entitled to any compensation from any of the ops and as such complaint of complainants deserve dismissal.
10. In view of our above discussion, we find no merit in the present complaint and same is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced: Member Member President,
Dated: 22.09.2023. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
